BEFORE THE DISTRICT FORUM:KURNOOL

Present: Sri K.V.H.Prasad, B.A., LL.B., President

and

Smt C.Preethi, M.A., LL.B., Member

Tuesday the 14th day of August, 2007

C. C.No.94/2007

Shaik Anwar Hussain, S/o. Late Shaik Dawood Ali,

Resident of H.No. 43-255-A, N.R.Peta, Kurnool - 518 004. .                                          

…      COMPLAINANT                   

Verses

The Branch Manager,THE HUTCH SHOP,

40-353-A, Alankar Plaza, Park Road, Kurnool-518 001.                                                   

…   OPPOSITE PARTY

          This complaint coming on this day for orders in the presence of   complainant in person, and the opposite party called absent and set exparte upon the persuing the material papers on record,  the Forum made the following:-

ORDER

(As per Sri. K.V.H.Prasad, President)

1.     This case of the Complainant is filed U/S 11 and 12 of C.P.Act claiming an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- alleging deficient and negligent

service of the Opposite Party in service of S.M.S. sent to group lotto mobile No.0031619134498 from in mobile phone No.9885867853 on 6.7.06 as was kept pending for four  hours after deducting charges said S.M.S. and he was also not furnished of the phone number for the call that was received on 7.7.06 to his mobile Number as the number of the caller was not displayed properly on the mobile screen, the Opposite Party has not provided the cogent proof of ownership to the Complainant's mobile phone No. 9885867853.

2.     In spite of service of notice of this forum as to this case of the Complainant the Opposite Party did not turn up to the case proceedings and remained absent and so the case is proceeded exparte to the Opposite Party for being adjudicated on merits.

3.     In substantiation of the complaint contentions the Complainant side as relied upon documentary record in Ex.A1 to Ex.A5 and his sworn affidavit in reiteration of his case .

4.     Hence the point for consideration is whether the Complainant made out any deficiency of the opposite party  towards him and there by any liability of the opposite party to the claim of the Complainant.

5.     The Ex.A1 is order copy of District Legal Service Authority(D.L.S.A) Kurnool appointing Smt.G. Raffat, Advocate as legal Aid counsel in pre litigation matter N0.133/06 and 154/06 of Complainant here in - in pursuance of the order of District Judge and chairman, D.L.S.A Kurnool. The Ex.A5 is the docket order passed by member of D.L.S.A. Kurnool in 154/06 closing said petition in the light of the request of the petitioner therein to launch a criminal case. In the absence of  the petition concerned in said 154/06 and the reason enunciated for closing the case in 154/06, the Ex.A1 and Ex.A5 finds little relevancy of their appreciation in this case.

6.     The Ex.A2 is filed as printed material that was said to have been provided by the opposite party to the Complainant allotting Hutch No.9885867853 to his mobile and Sim No.899143002018543013.  The Complainant alleges in reference to Ex.A2 the number of his mobile Hutch prepaid phone No. as 9885867853. In the absence of any material contradicting such a claim of the Complainant  the Ex.A2 is to believed as alleged by the complainant.

 7.    The Ex.A3 is filed as an e-mail received on 6.7.05 by the Complainant from "Award Department " < info - 2 - 68718032- 589-1- 72839   @ r. special gift cards. Com > requiring the complainant verify his identity as guaranteed winner up to $2500 to send the guaranteed money prize of $ 2500 and to use free chances to win up to 10 million $. The Complainant contents, in pursuance of said e-mail he has sent S.M.S from his mobile to group lotto mobile phone No.0031619134498 and inspite of collection of charges the said S.M.S. was delivered after four hours that to after his serious protest. There being any rebuttal to it the said fact remains worthy of believing . In the same way the sworn affidavit contentions of the Complainant as to the refusal of the Opposite Party to furnish him the phone number from which he  received a phone call to his mobile on  7.7.06 as the said caller phone  was not displayed properly in the mobile phone screen of the Complainant and as to the refusal to provide him cogent proof as to the mobile No. 9885867853 owned by the Complainant.

 8.     The Ex.A4 is filed as another e-mail he got on 8.7.06 from the same address as  that of Ex.A3 where in the Complainant was requested, in pursuance of his telephone conversation, to send last message received from the said addressee to start the process. By this the Complainant wants to impress that the circumstances the Ex.A3 has arisen on account of improper service of the Opposite Party in transmitting his S.M.S . The said circumstance also not being rebutted otherwise and in the cumulative effect of Ex.A2 to A.4 what remains clear is that the opposite party was of sheer negligence and deficient in its service to the customer like Complainant and there by making the Complainant not happy in the proper use of  his mobile and there by remaining liable to reimburse the Complainant for disadvantage suffered by the Complainant with his mobile in sending S.M.S.

9.      The Complainant is claiming an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- from the Opposite Party for the above deficiency of service. In the absence of any cogent material as to the loss the Complainant has incurred on account of said improper service of the opposite party in S.M.S. made by the Complainant,  the said claim appears to be exorbitant and in the circumstances an amount of Rs.1,000/- as compensation for said deficiency of the Opposite Party and an amount of Rs.1,000/- as costs appears to serve the ends of Justice.

10.     Therefore the complaint is allowed holding the deficiency of service of the Opposite Party  in the service of S.M.S. to the Complainant's  mobile phone number and so directing the opposite party to pay an amount of Rs.1,000/- as compensation and an amount of Rs.1,000/- as cost  to the complainant within a month of the receipt of this  order .  In default the supra stated award amount shall be payable  by the opposite party to the Complainant with 9% interest per annum from the date of said default till satisfactory realization of  the award amount.

     Dictated to the stenographer, transcribed by her, corrected and pronounced by us open bench on this day the 14th August, 2007.

MEMBER                                                                       PRESIDENT         

APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE

Witness Examined

For the complainant :Nil                       For the opposite parties: Nil 

List of exhibits marked for the complainant:-

  Ex.A1.       Proceedings of District Legal Services Authority,

                    Kurnool.

  Ex.A2.       As to giving of Hutch Connection.

  Ex.A3.       E-mail, dated 6.7.2005.

  Ex.A4.        E-mail, dated 8.7.2005.

  Ex.A5.       Adjudication Order, dated 10.10.2006

                    In PL.No.154/2006.

   List  of exhibits marked for the opposite parties: NIL

               Sd/-                                                                             Sd/-

          MEMBER                                                                       PRESIDENT              

  Copy to:- 

  Copy was made ready on:

  Copy was dispatched on:

  Copy was delivered to party.